My mistake, Kemp played only 9 years. He sat the 1969 season, not sure why. He might have retired for one year and then the Bills asked him to return for 1969. I also just found out he rushed for 40 TD's in his carrer. Quite impressive for a QB.
I still rank him below : Dawson Namath Blanda Hadl Lamonica
Sorry Jason, some of the stuff you quoted here is not accurate. The first AFL QB to pass for over 3000 yards in a seaon was Blanda in 1961. In fact he missed two games that year and only played in 12, yet still threw for 3330 yards and 36 TD's which was the professional football mark until passed by Marino in '84 and in a 16 game season. Blanda averaged 3 td's passes per game!
The career passing marks he holds were in a large part due to the fact he played 10 full years in the league. Namath had nearly as many stats in every category in 5 years. Dawson had 182 TD's in 8 years, Hadl had 142 TD passes in 8 years which included some time as a back up to Kemp. Kemp 114 TD's in 10 years just as a comparison.
Plus the QB rankings in the AFL, according to the 1970 TSN AFL history book, show Kemp ranked 9th all-time. They base their ranking on completion pct. only with a minimum number of attempts. Kemp's was terrible at 46.7. He also threw for 114 TD's in 3055 attempts and had 181 int's., Avg. gain 6.92. In other words hardly stellar. I'll give you the fact they he was the starting QB in 5 AFL championship games. His record was 2-3 in those games. His career playoff line looks like this: 139 att, 68 comp., 48.9 %, 993 yards, 2 TD's, 9 INT's, 1 rushing TD, 7.14 AVG Gain.. While making it to the championship match for 5 out of the 10 years the league existed was great, but his performance in those games was not. Buffalo won their two Championships with Kemp at the helm due to great defense and Cookie Gilchrist's running the ball. By the way, San Diego traded him to Buffalo to make room for a better QB. That being John Hadl.
Hadl put together some nice numbers from 1964 to 1973. His last years with Houston and the Packers really lowered his overall reputation.
Finally, what ranking method is used to rank these AFL QB's?
Len Dawson is head and shoulders above anyone in AFL history. Above Blanda, and way, way above Kemp.
In fact I think Dawson got snubbed being the first team All-AFL QB too. They gave that to Namath.
Rich >>
I have Kemp passing for 3,018 yards in 1960, BEFORE Blanda did it in 1961..Check on it...
Also, my post wasn't to try and say Kemp was better than Hadl statistically because he wasn't..Just pointing out that stats aren't everything...Being the QB for 5 Championship teams, going to 7 Pro Bowls, being named AFL MVP..Were all those voters wrong about Kemp? He must have done something right...
Personally, I don't think Hadl or Kemp are HOF material, hence I didn't vote for either...And I agree Dawson and Blanda and Namath for that matter were all head and shoulders above either of these guys, regardless of who has what stat...Hadl was also throwing to the 60's version of Jerry Rice Mr. Lance Alworth from 62-70 against mostly hideous AFL pass defenses..Sorry, but that explains his big totals more than anything...Once you took Alworth away Hadl became very average...Hadl's career Passer rating was 67.4..Kemp was very good either (57.3), but in those days this was the norm...
Here are your passer rating leaders from 1960-1969 in the AFL:
1960- Tom Flores- 71.8 1961- George Blanda 91.3 (2nd best guy was Babe Parilli at 76.5) 1962- Len Dawson 98.3 (Parilli was #2 with a 91.5, and the 3rd best QB was Frank Tripucka at 64.4) 1963- Tobin Rote 86.7 1964- Len Dawson 89.9 (Hadl was 2nd at 78.7) 1965- Dawson again at 81.3, Hadl again in 2nd with 71.3 1966- Dawson 101.7, Hadl was 3rd with 83.0 1967- Dawson 83.7, Hadl 3rd again with 74.5 1968- Dawson 98.6 (2nd place was Lamonica at 80.9) 1969- Greg Cook 88.3, Dawson was 4th 69.9
One thing overlooked about Kemp? He retired as the All-time leader in QB rushing TDs with 40...This record wasn't broken until Steve Young came along in the mid-1990s. Total TDs in the AFL years? Kemp 154 (without Alworth), Hadl 155...To me, these guys just aren't that different, and I don't see either ever making the HOF...
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>My mistake, Kemp played only 9 years. He sat the 1969 season, not sure why. He might have retired for one year and then the Bills asked him to return for 1969. I also just found out he rushed for 40 TD's in his carrer. Quite impressive for a QB.
I still rank him below : Dawson Namath Blanda Hadl Lamonica
in AFL history. >>
He actually sat 1968 due to injury...I agree with your rankings...And none of the bottom 3 are HOF material...Blanda REALLY only had 4-5 good AFL years..He wouldn't have made the HOF either if he hadn't become the Raiders kicker and added 9 years to his 26 year long career...
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Mike, gotcha covered..I have made the additions..I actually already had votes counted for you on Jackson, Lipscomb, Russell and Bakken...
Updated list w/ vote count...As of right now, anyone with 7** or more votes would make the set:
QBs Charlie Conerly-10** John Hadl-5 Jack Kemp-1 John Brodie-4 Roman Gabriel-5
RBs Larry Brown-4 Beattie Feathers-2 Willie Galimore-2 Floyd Little-10** Paul Lowe-5 Clem Daniels-3 Chuck Foreman-4 Don Perkins-3 Alan Ameche-3 'Deacon' Dan Towler-3
WRs Bob Hayes-11** Billy Howton-4 Art Powell-3 Pete Retzlaff-4 Del Shofner-4 Mac Speedie-10** Otis Taylor-11** Billy Wilson-10** Max McGee-4 Ken Kavanaugh-3 Gino Cappelletti-4 Gary Collins-3 Charley Hennigan-3
TE Jerry Smith-5 Bob Tucker-4 Lionel Taylor-5 Fred Arbanas-1
OL Ed Budde-7** Ken Gray-3 Winston Hill-5 Jerry Kramer-11** John Niland-3 Dick Stanfel-10** Walt Sweeney-5 Mick Tingelhoff-12** Fuzzy Thurston-4 Jim Tyrer-9** Grady Alderman-4 Dick Schafrath-4 Gale Gillingham-5 Len Hauss-4 George Kunz-4 Ray Wietecha-3 Jim Ray Smith-2 Ralph Neely-2 Bucko Kilroy-3
DLs Gene Brito-4 Curley Culp-3 L.C. Greenwood-12** Claude Humphrey-11** Rich Jackson-8** Alex Karras-9** Gene Lipscomb-8** Jim Marshall-8** Jerry Mays-2 Tom Sestak-3 Cedric Hardman-3 Bill Stanfill-3
LBs Maxie Baughan-6 Chris Hanburger-12** E.J. Holub-4 Chuck Howley-12** Lee Roy Jordan-11** Tommy Nobis-12** Les Richter-6 Dave Robinson-11** Andy Russell-9** Bill Bergey-4 Mike Stratton-2 Isiah Robertson-3 Joe Fortunato-1
DBs Dick Anderson-3 Jack Butler-8** Pat Fischer-10** Cliff Harris-12** Lemar Parrish-8** Johnny Robinson-10** Bob Boyd-2 Bobby Dillion-3 Jake Scott-6 Erich Barnes-4 Jimmy Patton-3 Dave Grayson-2 Dick LeBeau-2 Emmitt Thomas-2
As of now, 27 players would make the list. A few others are very close, I'll let the vote run until tomorrow morning...
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>I still think that Jerry Smith should be included.
Regards,
Greg M. >>
He's a no doubter, for me. >>
If he was that close, he would AT LEAST get some type of consideration from the committee..Now that Sanders is in, maybe it will open up his possibilities..For me, he was a good TE, but not a HOF one...In those days you needed to be a great blocker as a TE, and Smith was not...Regardless of whatever he was or was not off the field, I would be surprised to see him ever get in...Just not enough credentials...2 Pro Bowls, 1 time 1st Team All-Pro in a 13 year career? Yes, he accumulated descent numbers for his day, but really what separates him from Fred Arbanas or Riley Odoms who both played during his era? Both of those guys were much more highly regarded during the same years Smith was playing? Odoms played in 15 fewer games over his career and caught 25 fewer passes, had 259 more yards, 19 fewer TDs...Odoms was a 1st Team All-Pro 3 times and was selected to 4 Pro Bowls...
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Jason, I stand corrected on the passing yards for Kemp in 1960. I think Kemp was a fine leader of the teams he was on too. I just didn't feel he was that much better, if at all than John Hadl. The rushing TD's he had in his career were impressive. I don't think he ever makes the Hall either.
One thing about Blanda, was that he was the AFC player of the year in 1970 at the age of 43 for his last minute game winning kicking and passing exploits. I remember seeing a few of those games as a kid. I think he had more than just 5 good years in Football. It was closer to 10 years. He was the AFL player of the year in 1961. He did win a few AFL championships along the way. Set ton's of records in both passing and scoring as well. Sure his first 10 years in Football with the Bears were probably average, but he was a long time star of the AFL and then the AFC in the early to mid 1970's. He was a great backup QB for the Raiders too for a few years well into his 40's, at a time when most NFL players that age had been retired for 10 years already.
To me longevity in Football counts for more than any other sport. Simply by the physical nature of the game. It's not like in Baseball, where a player can hang around forever as long he can swing a bat as DH, pad his hitting numbers and not have to play the field.
In Football, there's no plays off. If you're on defense or offense there's 60-80 plays per game you're involved in. That's why I rank Blanda and Jim Marshall right up there with the other greats. I mean, don't you think that NFL GM's are always looking to upgrade their teams with younger talent. The fact these guys held their jobs and performed them at high levels with championship calibre teams every year when they were both over 30 years old, speaks volumes to me.
Even though Jim Marshall lacks pro bowl appearances and All-NFL team votes, he must have been great to simply hold down a starting position on a great DL on so many great Viking teams in the 1970's at his advanced age. Even though he was fairly small in stature for a DL, he never wore down or missed any games. The four Super Bowl appearances for the Vikings during his career adds to his reputation. I'm sure every draft for the Vikings in the 1970's they were looking to upgrade their line in some way. They'd bring in some new talent or draft pick only to find out that this 'new talent' couldn't beat out old man Marshall once again. He was a rock.
I think that can be a bit mis-leading as times were much different in the 60-70s as far as player movement goes...There was no free agency, and no one was making million dollar salaries...I'm not saying Marshall was not a good player, he was, but when you stack him up vs. other HOF Defensive Lineman, not only his credentials, but his play on the field, he doesn't stack up in any area other than longevity...
Let's look closer...Marshall played from 1960-1979..He started every game he ever played in, 282 in all, which is very impressive, no doubt about it..And honestly is the reason he is a serious senior candidate...He played with the Vikings from 1961-1979...Eller was the other DE starter from 64-77...Page from 1968-1977 at DT, and Gary Larsen the other DT from 65-74...The personnel were very stable, and Larsen was no slouch making just as many Pro Bowls as Marshall (2)..From 61-79, the Vikings drafted Only 3 DE's in the first 3 rounds of any of those drafts...Carl Eller(1964) who became an immediate starter, Mike Mullaney (1975) who replaced Eller as the starter in 1978 when he left to Seattle, and Randy Holloway (1978) who did replace Marshall as starter when Marshall retired after the 1979 season...So the Vikings weren't exactly TRYING to replace him and nor should they have...He was an excellent player...But take away the final 5 years of his career, in which he was performing at a very pedestrian level and he's not even in the discussion...Vinny Testaverde played forever and had the same number of Pro Bowls, yet I don't hear anyone screaming his name in the HOF debate...
If you watched Greenwood, or Claude Humphrey play or even Big Daddy Lipscomb or Tombstone Jackson, and then compare what they did ON THE FIELD to Jim Marshall, all of those guys were far more dominant..Had ANY of them played for 20 straight years without missing a game, they would have been in the HOF a long time ago..Marshall was a role player on a bad ass defense...He was to Vikings what Horace Grant was to the Bulls...To put him in the HOF simply because he was lucky enough not to get hurt would be wrong IMO. At least the other players who were better as his same position should go in first...
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I agree Greenwood, Jackson. and Humphrey were all better than Marshall and should go to the Hall first. I saw them all play.
I know the lack of player movement caused many players to stay put during their career. It's a different NFL today with tons of players exchanging teams.
I guess my point was Marshall was he was a vital cog on many fine playoff teams and defenses. Not getting hurt was obviously a part of his longevity, some luck, and some his physical conditioning. But I find it hard to believe that the Vikings wouldn't try to upgrade his position with a lower paid rookie if Marshall was just hanging on the last few years. The Vikes let Alan Page get away after what 10 years to a division rival. Eller was traded. Marshall wasn't. Maybe he didn't warrant more than a stack of clean towels in trade being a late 30's DL, so the Vikes just kept him. I don't really know. But I don't think he was just hanging on either. Being undersized and older for his position, he had to have some skills left, cunning, and smarts to keep being a more than capable starter at his advanced age. I saw Marshall play at least 30 NFL games, and I don't remember him ever being an easy defender to run through or around even when he was 37 or 38 years old. He was tough.
As far as Big Daddy, I've only seen film on him. From what I've heard about him, he was either dominant or he took plays off. He was one of those players if he set his mind to it, he could just dominant. I didn't place a vote for him for the Hall because I felt a few other DL's were just more deserving. But in all honestly I wouldn't have a problem if he got the call to the Hall.
In my opinion, it's difficult to judge linemen. Unless you saw them play extensively, then all we have go on is the pro bowls, all league selections, and team success to judge them on.
I wish there was more footage of the early AFL's games to see.
Do you guys think Rodney Harrison has a chance? I know he's known as a dirty player, but I have always loved his intensity. Maybe this reputation has hurt his pro bowl chances?
Speaking of pro bowls... Why the heck was Gregg Bingham never invited? He was a tackling monster and that's what defense is all about I thought... Add to that 21 interceptions. I'm currently watching the same thing happen again with Keith Bulluck. How can you lead the entire NFL in tackles and not get an invite to the pro bowl?
Do you guys think Rodney Harrison has a chance? I know he's known as a dirty player, but I have always loved his intensity. Maybe this reputation has hurt his pro bowl chances?
Speaking of pro bowls... Why the heck was Gregg Bingham never invited? He was a tackling monster and that's what defense is all about I thought... Add to that 21 interceptions. I'm currently watching the same thing happen again with Keith Bulluck. How can you lead the entire NFL in tackles and not get an invite to the pro bowl? >>
I don't think Harrison has dominant enough for long enough...Injuries have really taken their toll on him and his career...
LB is a tough position to judge...The LBs that are considered a "disrupter" tend to get more pub and more accolades than the steady "make the tackle" kind of guys...Nature of the game I guess...
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I thought Gregg Bingham was an excellent LB too. He and Brazile are two great reasons why the Oilers D was so tough in the late 1970's.
I never heard Rodney Hampton was a 'dirty player' before. Is this a well known fact. I mean did he kick guys in piles or take cheap shots on the field? I know he'll never make the Hall....... I wish he would though. I have a stack of 50 of his 1990 Score Update RC's. LOL.
What about blocking Tight ends? You never really hear of any of them mentioned for the HOF. The closest was probably Charlie Sanders who just got in. Although he was a good receiving TE too.
What about guys like Ron Kramer, Marv Fleming, Fred Arbanas, Raymond Chester, Jim Muscheller (sp) Colts, etc...... and I'm sure there's many others you guys could add to the list. Do you think any of them will ever make the Hall?
Come on Jason, where's the list of great blocking TE's? I know you must have one already selected. Please share.....
Although no such records are kept by the league, he is believed to hold the record for most times fined by the league for unnecessary roughness or unsportsmanlike conduct. Notorious for his cheap shots, Harrison was voted the dirtiest player in the NFL by his peers according to a poll conducted by Sports Illustrated. In 2006, Harrison further solidified his reputation as one of the dirtiest players in NFL history when he, yet again, topped the list of the dirtiest players compiled by Sports Illustrated. Of the 361 NFL players polled during the preseason, an incredible 23 percent of them pointed to Harrison as the league's dirtiest player. When interviewed about Harrison for an October 19, 2006 Boston Herald article, Buffalo receiver Lee Evans supported the notion that Harrison is a dirty player, “you can see it on film. It will be subtle, like making a tackle and doing something a little extra after it. You’re getting up and maybe he pushes your face into the ground or gives you a little kick in the back."
In all the games I've seen him in I've never thought, "man, that was a cheap shot", but again maybe I haven't seen the right game(s).
<< <i>I agree Greenwood, Jackson. and Humphrey were all better than Marshall and should go to the Hall first. I saw them all play. >>
No argument on those three. I voted for them all.
<< <i>I guess my point was Marshall was he was a vital cog on many fine playoff teams and defenses. Not getting hurt was obviously a part of his longevity, some luck, and some his physical conditioning. But I find it hard to believe that the Vikings wouldn't try to upgrade his position with a lower paid rookie if Marshall was just hanging on the last few years. The Vikes let Alan Page get away after what 10 years to a division rival. >>
And Alan says they citied the fact that he had slimmed down as a reason for sending him to the Bears, so it was something their management was cognizant of.
<< <i> Being undersized and older for his position, he had to have some skills left, cunning, and smarts to keep being a more than capable starter at his advanced age. I saw Marshall play at least 30 NFL games, and I don't remember him ever being an easy defender to run through or around even when he was 37 or 38 years old. He was tough. >>
It's hard to overemphasize just how relatively undersized he was. And yet he still kept down that side of the line for a long, long time on a top flight team.
Of all of the leagues, the NFL is the most ruthless and pitiless when it comes to personnel decisions, but as cb points out, in all of Jim's career, they never seemed to want to move him out, or think they could. Just something to keep in mind.
Although no such records are kept by the league, he is believed to hold the record for most times fined by the league for unnecessary roughness or unsportsmanlike conduct. Notorious for his cheap shots, Harrison was voted the dirtiest player in the NFL by his peers according to a poll conducted by Sports Illustrated. In 2006, Harrison further solidified his reputation as one of the dirtiest players in NFL history when he, yet again, topped the list of the dirtiest players compiled by Sports Illustrated. Of the 361 NFL players polled during the preseason, an incredible 23 percent of them pointed to Harrison as the league's dirtiest player. When interviewed about Harrison for an October 19, 2006 Boston Herald article, Buffalo receiver Lee Evans supported the notion that Harrison is a dirty player, “you can see it on film. It will be subtle, like making a tackle and doing something a little extra after it. You’re getting up and maybe he pushes your face into the ground or gives you a little kick in the back."
In all the games I've seen him in I've never thought, "man, that was a cheap shot", but again maybe I haven't seen the right game(s). >>
Sorry, I totally mis-read your post. I was thinking of Rodney Hampton the Giants running back from the 1990's for some strange reason.
So yeah, Rodney Harrison does indeed have a bad rep as being a cheapshot hitter. The Conrad Dobler of defense if you will.
It's hard to overemphasize just how relatively undersized he was. And yet he still kept down that side of the line for a long, long time on a top flight team.
Of all of the leagues, the NFL is the most ruthless and pitiless when it comes to personnel decisions.
GDM67, Exactly on Jim Marshall. I think he played around 230 lbs. at his peak. I saw an interview with Marshall a few years ago and he said he played at 220 lbs during his later years to try to get an edge over the heavier lineman. Trying to make up for his lost speed as he aged by playing lighter. Anything to gain an edge on the opponents linemen. Alan Page played lighter as he got older too. Maybe it had something to do with the Vikings defensive line coach theories on playing the DL position. Even Eller who was 6'6", played at 250 or so. The Vikings had some lean beef up front.
<< <i> What about blocking Tight ends? You never really hear of any of them mentioned for the HOF. The closest was probably Charlie Sanders who just got in. Although he was a good receiving TE too.
What about guys like Ron Kramer, Marv Fleming, Fred Arbanas, Raymond Chester, Jim Muscheller (sp) Colts, etc...... and I'm sure there's many others you guys could add to the list. Do you think any of them will ever make the Hall?
Come on Jason, where's the list of great blocking TE's? I know you must have one already selected. Please share..... >>
Obviously, simply being a good blocking TE is not going to get you into the HOF, only that being a WR playing TE (aka Jerry Smith) in the 60s-70s did not fit the model of what a good TE was back then. Being a great blocker, but having only 200 catches (Fred Arbanas is a great example) is not going to get you into the HOF. I don't think another Senior TE will make the HOF, at least not in the next 20 years..Sanders was the first, and of the guys on our list I don't see any of them as HOFers. None of them have gotten any support from the Senior Committee. Sanders was easily the best of that bunch and I was surprised he even got in..He barely beat out Bob Hayes in the senior selections and my guess he would not have if Hayes weren't a senior finalist just 3 years ago...To look at the overall list of Senior candidates and think that only 2 of these guys will get in every year, not to mention the modern candidates who will join this list in the coming years tells me that there is no chance.
Look, we all have different ideas and different favorites that we think are the most overlooked, etc, etc, etc...And that's ok..You think we are bad, the senior committee has the same issues...Everyone has different guys they are backing/pushing/hoping to get in...We all voted on this Senior list, and we mostly agree that 28 of the players are very deserving. Next year, I would definitely think Gradishar, Kuechenberg and Pearson would all deserve to be added to this list if/when they don't get in the HOF in 2008.
The reality is Jerry Smith, along with other 3 TEs on our list will likely never get close. If he does, and he makes the semi-finals for the Seniors (Final 15-20) then we will request to add him. To my knowledge he's never been that close and was also never a finalist in his 20 years as a modern candidate either.
That doesn't mean you can't own his card. Just means that the rest of us won't be required to buy it for the Future HOF- Seniors Set. My hope is that every card i but for the set eventually ends up in the HOF RC set.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Voting for the Senior Set is now finalized. Here it is:
Updated list w/ vote count...As of right now, anyone with 7** or more votes would make the set:
QBs Charlie Conerly-10*
RBs Floyd Little-10**
WRs Bob Hayes-11** Mac Speedie-10** Otis Taylor-11** Billy Wilson-10**
OL Ed Budde-7** Jerry Kramer-11** Dick Stanfel-10** Mick Tingelhoff-12** Jim Tyrer-9**
DLs L.C. Greenwood-12** Claude Humphrey-11** Rich Jackson-8** Alex Karras-9** Gene Lipscomb-8** Jim Marshall-8**
LBs Chris Hanburger-12** Chuck Howley-12** Lee Roy Jordan-11** Tommy Nobis-12** Dave Robinson-11** Andy Russell-9**
DBs Jack Butler-8** Pat Fischer-10** Cliff Harris-12** Lemar Parrish-8** Johnny Robinson-10**
28 very strong candidates IMO. I will put the spreadsheet together today and post here along with the weighting once complete. I will be submitting this set as well as the Modern set to Cosetta today. Hopefully will be up online within the next couple of weeks. Now the hard part, trying to find all these cards I USED to own!lol
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
OK, Here is the Senior Set: Card # Year Co. First Name Last Name Grade Weight 53 1948 LEAF CHARLIE CONERLY 10 8 1950 BOWMAN MAC SPEEDIE 3 36 1955 BOWMAN DICK STANFEL 2 81 1955 BOWMAN BILLY WILSON 2 15 1957 TOPPS JACK BUTLER 2 36 1959 TOPPS GENE LIPSCOMB 1.5 103 1959 TOPPS ALEX KARRAS 2 116 1959 TOPPS JERRY KRAMER 2 202 1961 FLEER JOHNNY ROBINSON 1.5 107 1963 TOPPS JIM MARSHALL 2 93 1964 TOPPS ED BUDDE 1 108 1964 TOPPS JIM TYRER 1 110 1964 PHILADELPHIA MICK TINGELHOFF 1.5 160 1965 PHILADELPHIA PAT FISCHER 1.5 58 1966 PHILADELPHIA BOB HAYES 3.5 59 1966 PHILADELPHIA CHUCK HOWLEY 2.5 75 1966 TOPPS OTIS TAYLOR 2 7 1967 PHILADELPHIA TOMMY NOBIS 2 54 1967 PHILADELPHIA LEE ROY JORDAN 1.5 80 1967 PHILADELPHIA DAVE ROBINSON 1.5 183 1967 PHILADELPHIA CHRIS HANBURGER 2 163 1968 TOPPS ANDY RUSSELL 1 173 1968 TOPPS FLOYD LITTLE 1.5 95 1970 TOPPS RICH JACKSON 1 156 1970 TOPPS CLAUDE HUMPHREY 1 233 1971 TOPPS LEMAR PARRISH 1 101 1972 TOPPS L.C. GREENWOOD 1.5 490 1975 TOPPS CLIFF HARRIS 1
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Regarding the weights. I know the majority of the weight is by the scarcity of the card or the quality of the player but what about the difficulty to get the card graded high? 1969 Topps - 1971 Topps - 1962 Topps due to boders. I think this should push some of the weights up on certain cards. What do you think?
The weights are pushed 100% by pricing. Mainly using SMR (which is PSAs standard method), but I made slight corrections to cards that I know sell for a premium.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
As we all know, SMR is flawed. I think condition sensitive cards/sets should have some sort of higher weight.
I think we should go by SMR period or take all accounts into effect before we put weights on sets. This HOF wannabe set is not that important as the HOF Rookie or All - Time sets but I wanted to strike up a conversation to open up other thoughts on weighting of these sets.
Jason tracks all cards so I'm sure all is taken into consideration. Just by first glance, all seems good. If you have any suggestions/comments about the weighting, (ie..one seems to be weighted too high or not high enough), please post here and we can discuss...
<< <i>Jason tracks all cards so I'm sure all is taken into consideration. Just by first glance, all seems good. If you have any suggestions/comments about the weighting, (ie..one seems to be weighted too high or not high enough), please post here and we can discuss...
dave >>
Bingo..While the SMR is wrong, its wrong on 99% of the cards, so that is used as a basis. Not my call, that is what Cosetta has told me in the past to go by. But I do track the prices, and adjusted a couple of cards accordingly based on what I know they sell for..All the issues you pointed out, particularly condition sensitive cards are reflected in the sales price correct? If a card is tough to come by in PSA 8, it sells for more, makes sense. You pointed out 69, 71, and 62, and the only card from any of these sets is the 1971 Parrish, and its value in PSA 8 is clearly a grade weight of 1. It sells under $20...
The HOF RC set in particular, the weights are based SOLEY on SMR. I update the grade weights with Cosetta once per year and do not make any adjustments. We all know it is not correct, but that is what we have to go by. If you start trying to weight the sets to meet what each collector thinks, you will run into the same issues we had here on some of the players..And that is, everyone has a different idea of what is right and best. For the record, these are the specific adjustments I made on this set weighting:
Bob Hayes from 3.0 to 3.5, as it usually sells above $200. The 1955 Stanfel and 1957 Butler were bumped from 1.5 to 2.0 as both of these cards usually sell in the $100 range. Also the 1967 Philly Hanburger and Nobis were also bumped from 1.5-2.0 because they typically sell higher than $100...The 1948 Conerly has an SMR of $1300 in PSA 8, and it would likely sell for twice that amount at a minimum, which is why it is so far and above the other cards in weighting. This is going to be a liquid set, so it would be irresponsible to weight anything else higher than the Bob Hayes at 3.5, because it is the 2nd most valuable card with an SMR of $145, but selling at $200 plus.
If you have any specific changes you think should be made, feel free to bring them up and I will take it into consideration. I'm trying to create the best set possible for everyone...
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
If everyone wants me to use the same standards as the NFL HOF RC set, I can do that, but since that is based on the Nagurski SMR in PSA 8, the highest set weighting we would have would be Conerly at 6.5, and most others would end up as grade weight of 1...Wouldn't make much sense to me since no other card out there is going to be worth the 18,000+ SMR of the Nagurski in PSA 8.
Personally, I'm just hoping Cosetta's schedule is open enough that we can get these sets loaded sooner rather than later..lol I'm interested in seeing what everyone already has..I'm missing 20 of the 28 Senior's...lol..Hopefully I will have a few more in hand prior to the set going live...I have a feeling this will spike the prices a bit...
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Woo Hoo. These team sets are paying off! I actually have 15 or 16 of the seniors already. Though a couple are in 5/6 holders. It'll be a nice start though.
Thanks a lot for doing this Jason. I think it's a cool set and like I said before, it'll really help me when I look at retiring off my other all time sets in favor of the Decade team sets and the HOF set (Which is now nearing 80% completion, but still in 18th place)
<< <i>Woo Hoo. These team sets are paying off! I actually have 15 or 16 of the seniors already. Though a couple are in 5/6 holders. It'll be a nice start though.
Thanks a lot for doing this Jason. I think it's a cool set and like I said before, it'll really help me when I look at retiring off my other all time sets in favor of the Decade team sets and the HOF set (Which is now nearing 80% completion, but still in 18th place)
-Josh >>
Josh, I retired most of my All-Time Team sets in 2005...Since I wasn't sure which Seniors to keep or sell, I pretty much sold them all with the thought that if/when they ever pop up as Senior Finalists, I would pick them up then..It was just costing me too much to keep all of the sets I had going. Of the cards I sold, 12 of them were cards I now need for the Seniors set...PSA 10 Greenwood, PSA 8 Bob Hayes, PSA 8 Howley, PSA 8 Hanburger being the most expensive of the bunch...Based on what I sold for then, its going to cost me more now to get them back. But having a set that they can all belong to rather than having to collect all the Team Sets is going to help me justify (to myself) owning the cards...Other card I sold like PSA 9 Rayfield Wright, PSA 9 Harry Carson who eventually MADE the HOF, those cost me 3-4 times what I sold them for as non-HOFers to get them back as HOFers...I think whoever collects these sets will save money in the long run...Everytime one of these guys gets elected, particularly the Seniors, you will have probably paid MUCH less than what the price of each will be as a HOFer. Just ask Gene Hickerson, Charlie Sanders and Roger Wehrli!!! lol
I'm also glad the voting went so well and kept the Senior set manageable. 28 is a solid number as I feared initially the set could have gone the other way and ended up even bigger than the modern set (54)...I am 99.9% certain that the 2008 Senior HOF candidates reside in this set...Hard to say after that, because members of the Senior Committee do change from time to time, and that can change the names that get pushed...
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
If anyone has extra PSA 9's of the 1970's players that will be included in this set, feel free to PM me. Thanks.
Shag
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
<< <i>Do you have any PSA 8's? I need all of the 70's rookies but Greenwood. >>
Just a Parrish, but I only have 1.
"My father would womanize, he would drink. He would make outrageous claims like he invented the question mark. Sometimes he would accuse chestnuts of being lazy. The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament. Our childhood was typical. Summers in Rangoon, luge lessons. In the spring we'd make meat helmets. When we were insolent we were placed in a burlap bag and beaten with reeds - pretty standard really."
Modern: PSA 9 1984 Topps Morten Andersen PSA 9 1984 Topps Darrell Green PSA 9 1986 Topps Andre Reed PSA 9 1993 SP Will Shields PSA 9 1997 SP Authentic Orlando Pace PSA 9 1999 SP Authentic Torry Holt
If anyone is interested in buying or trading for these, shoot me a PM or you can e-mail me at jabeduco@yahoo.com.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Jason like always i think you have a good grip on the weights ,i may suggest that the 67 nobis and hanburger are going to much much tougher that most think , The Hanburger will be a bi------ch 1 of the hardest of all on the list.
The 67 Robinson however even though its a packer is 1 of the easier cards in the 67 set
The last Nobis sold for around 90+ by the way in a 8
<< <i>Jason like always i think you have a good grip on the weights ,i may suggest that the 67 nobis and hanburger are going to much much tougher that most think , The Hanburger will be a bi------ch 1 of the hardest of all on the list.
The 67 Robinson however even though its a packer is 1 of the easier cards in the 67 set
The last Nobis sold for around 90+ by the way in a 8 >>
I already know the Hanburger well..I've owned a couple, maybe even one from you back in the day I if I recall...They won't come cheap now, never did...I already have a Nobis 9...The other toughie is going to be the 1964 Tyrer...VERY low pop for some reason..
If you find any Hanburger's floating around, throw me a bone!!!lol
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>The reality is Jerry Smith, along with other 3 TEs on our list will likely never get close. >>
I'm forced to agree, but considering that his career ended 30 years ago and his records were only recently broken, that is truly a shame.
<< <i>I think he played around 230 lbs. at his peak. I saw an interview with Marshall a few years ago and he said he played at 220 lbs during his later years to try to get an edge over the heavier lineman. Trying to make up for his lost speed as he aged by playing lighter. Anything to gain an edge on the opponents linemen. Alan Page played lighter as he got older too. Maybe it had something to do with the Vikings defensive line coach theories on playing the DL position. Even Eller who was 6'6", played at 250 or so. The Vikings had some lean beef up front.
Rich >>
The Bills seemed to subscribe to the same theories with Bruce and Bennett, with similar mixed results.
Here are the 7 cards from my most recent submission.
1948 Wojo. Paid $26 raw off ebay. My other "UNCENTERED 6" is currently on Ebay. This one could be a 7 if not for the lower left corner and very slight browning of left side.
61 Shaw. I actually bought this raw at a card shop in my hometown. It is a very small shop that I've been in maybe 5 times. I just happened to pop in during a downtown festival and saw this hidden in the bottom of a dusty case. I paid $12 for it. It will be going on ebay because I already have a nice 7.
66 HIckerson. Bought raw off ebay via a BIN for $8 from arizona card sales. (as seen earlier in this thread). I bought it after announced as Sr finanlist but before actually elected. Upon receiving it back, It did look better than I remembered. Still suprised it didn't at least get a ST qualifier. This will also end up on ebay.
71 Sanders and Wehrli. I thought both had a good shot at 8. They are very nice 7's though. Paid $10 for Wehrli raw off ebay and $6 for Sanders off someone's website. (cant remember which one) I actually bought it the day he was elected. I will be keeping both of these for my set.
74 Guy. Bought raw off ebay for $3 plus shipping. Thought this was a slam dunk 8 and had a great shot at a 9. I still don't know what I missed. I may have to resubmit this one.
35 Chicle Griffith. I know he isn't a HOF'er, but I couldn't resist this one. I put a lowball Best Offer of $50 and it was accepted. Anyone have any idea what this one might sell for??
I've heard that Ebay will be having a 20 cent listing day tomorrow. You will see some of these with fairly high starting prices but it doesn't hurt to try right?? If they don't sell, I will probably just list them starting at 99cents and let em ride.
35 Chicle Griffith. I know he isn't a HOF'er, but I couldn't resist this one. I put a lowball Best Offer of $50 and it was accepted. Anyone have any idea what this one might sell for??
Dave >>
Dave last PSA 5 on ebay sold for $97...Sounds like you scored another deal!
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Jason, Your final list of candidates looks fine and the weighting seems okay to me too. Thanks for all of your work on setting up this new set. It will be fun trying to piece together some of these cards. I have a few of them already.
Dave, Nice cards! Looks like the Sanders RC only missed being an 8 for the t-b centering. I thought your 'raw' Hickerson would only grade a 7 too, but it looks nice in the holder. The slight stain doesn't seem to detract much at all. Again, some nice buys by you.
Just got done putting these sets in my little database I use.
If I did this right... On the Modern set I will have a GPA of 8.95 - 80% - 5.66 Senior Set GPA 6.93 - 54% - 2.99
Not the greatest, but certainly a nice head start. Heck, I can get a couple free gradings from the modern set as soon as it's listed. I have a few of the other cards raw, and waiting to be listed.
Can't wait to see the sets listed!
By the way, does anyone have a PSA 10 Jimmy Smith or Tim Brown for sale?
Oh and I have many of the modern cards at PSA now, or in my box to go to PSA. I have numerous copies of Emmitt, Butler, Dawson, Randle, Sharpe, McDaniel, Seau, Roaf, Elam & Shields.
In a few cases I have >10 to be graded that should all be PSA 8 or better.
Talked to Cosetta and we are going to have to provide a Set Description for each of the new sets. Here's what I cam up with, let me know if you think anything needs to be added or subtracted::
MODERN This set is comprised of modern candidates eligible for induction into the Pro Football Hall of Fame as well as current players who have already proven to be Hall of Fame worthy. The players on this list are all widely considered to be likely or definite future Hall of Fame inductees. To be included in this set, an active player must have completed a minimum of 5 seasons in the NFL, and a retired candidate must have ended his career no longer than 25 years ago. As these players are elected the the Pro Football Hall of Fame, their card will be deleted from this Registry set and added directly to the NFL Hall of Fame Rookie Players set.
SENIOR This set is comprised of senior candidates eligible for induction into the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Senior candidates are Hall of Fame eligible players whose career ended more than 25 years ago. Most of these players were very close to induction during their years as modern candidates. The Hall of Fame Senior Committee selects two players each year from the group of senior candidates which are presented to the Hall of Fame voters’ side-by-side with the 15 modern finalists. While the players on this list could possibly become Hall of Famers in the future, all have waited 26+ years so none are considered likely or definite. The set consists of the top senior candidates over the past few years and provides a glimpse at which players are believed to have the best chance at election. As these players are elected the the Pro Football Hall of Fame, their card will be deleted from this Registry set and added directly to the NFL Hall of Fame Rookie Players set.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
MODERN This set is comprised of modern candidates eligible for induction into the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Modern candidates are Hall of Fame eligible players whose career ended between 5 and 25 years ago. The players on this list are widely considered to be likely or definite future Hall of Fame inductees.
>>
Do we need to qualify the lower end of the years? Why not choose current to 25 years. We had Emmitt Smith and Brett Favre on our list of current players to get in. If we choose 5-25 many players would be left out. Which way are we leaning?
MODERN This set is comprised of modern candidates eligible for induction into the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Modern candidates are Hall of Fame eligible players whose career ended between 5 and 25 years ago. The players on this list are widely considered to be likely or definite future Hall of Fame inductees.
>>
Do we need to qualify the lower end of the years? Why not choose current to 25 years. We had Emmitt Smith and Brett Favre on our list of current players to get in. If we choose 5-25 many players would be left out. Which way are we leaning? >>
You are absolutely correct. I totally left out the piece regarding ACTIVE players, which we will obviously have in the set. I will adjust accordingly. See, this is why I asked for comments!!lol
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I have edited my initial Set Description. Take a look and let me know what you think.
Jason
I'm here to question, not to inspire or build up. To live how I want, as I see fit, according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Comments
I still rank him below :
Dawson
Namath
Blanda
Hadl
Lamonica
in AFL history.
<< <i>
Sorry Jason, some of the stuff you quoted here is not accurate. The first AFL QB to pass for over 3000 yards in a seaon was Blanda in 1961. In fact he missed two games that year and only played in 12, yet still threw for 3330 yards and 36 TD's which was the professional football mark until passed by Marino in '84 and in a 16 game season. Blanda averaged 3 td's passes per game!
The career passing marks he holds were in a large part due to the fact he played 10 full years in the league. Namath had nearly as many stats in every category in 5 years. Dawson had 182 TD's in 8 years, Hadl had 142 TD passes in 8 years which included some time as a back up to Kemp. Kemp 114 TD's in 10 years just as a comparison.
Plus the QB rankings in the AFL, according to the 1970 TSN AFL history book, show Kemp ranked 9th all-time. They base their ranking on completion pct. only with a minimum number of attempts. Kemp's was terrible at 46.7. He also threw for 114 TD's in 3055 attempts and had 181 int's., Avg. gain 6.92. In other words hardly stellar. I'll give you the fact they he was the starting QB in 5 AFL championship games. His record was 2-3 in those games. His career playoff line looks like this: 139 att, 68 comp., 48.9 %, 993 yards, 2 TD's, 9 INT's, 1 rushing TD, 7.14 AVG Gain.. While making it to the championship match for 5 out of the 10 years the league existed was great, but his performance in those games was not. Buffalo won their two Championships with Kemp at the helm due to great defense and Cookie Gilchrist's running the ball. By the way, San Diego traded him to Buffalo to make room for a better QB. That being John Hadl.
Hadl put together some nice numbers from 1964 to 1973. His last years with Houston and the Packers really lowered his overall reputation.
Finally, what ranking method is used to rank these AFL QB's?
Len Dawson is head and shoulders above anyone in AFL history. Above Blanda, and way, way above Kemp.
In fact I think Dawson got snubbed being the first team All-AFL QB too. They gave that to Namath.
Rich >>
I have Kemp passing for 3,018 yards in 1960, BEFORE Blanda did it in 1961..Check on it...
Also, my post wasn't to try and say Kemp was better than Hadl statistically because he wasn't..Just pointing out that stats aren't everything...Being the QB for 5 Championship teams, going to 7 Pro Bowls, being named AFL MVP..Were all those voters wrong about Kemp? He must have done something right...
Personally, I don't think Hadl or Kemp are HOF material, hence I didn't vote for either...And I agree Dawson and Blanda and Namath for that matter were all head and shoulders above either of these guys, regardless of who has what stat...Hadl was also throwing to the 60's version of Jerry Rice Mr. Lance Alworth from 62-70 against mostly hideous AFL pass defenses..Sorry, but that explains his big totals more than anything...Once you took Alworth away Hadl became very average...Hadl's career Passer rating was 67.4..Kemp was very good either (57.3), but in those days this was the norm...
Here are your passer rating leaders from 1960-1969 in the AFL:
1960- Tom Flores- 71.8
1961- George Blanda 91.3 (2nd best guy was Babe Parilli at 76.5)
1962- Len Dawson 98.3 (Parilli was #2 with a 91.5, and the 3rd best QB was Frank Tripucka at 64.4)
1963- Tobin Rote 86.7
1964- Len Dawson 89.9 (Hadl was 2nd at 78.7)
1965- Dawson again at 81.3, Hadl again in 2nd with 71.3
1966- Dawson 101.7, Hadl was 3rd with 83.0
1967- Dawson 83.7, Hadl 3rd again with 74.5
1968- Dawson 98.6 (2nd place was Lamonica at 80.9)
1969- Greg Cook 88.3, Dawson was 4th 69.9
One thing overlooked about Kemp? He retired as the All-time leader in QB rushing TDs with 40...This record wasn't broken until Steve Young came along in the mid-1990s. Total TDs in the AFL years? Kemp 154 (without Alworth), Hadl 155...To me, these guys just aren't that different, and I don't see either ever making the HOF...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>My mistake, Kemp played only 9 years. He sat the 1969 season, not sure why. He might have retired for one year and then the Bills asked him to return for 1969. I also just found out he rushed for 40 TD's in his carrer. Quite impressive for a QB.
I still rank him below :
Dawson
Namath
Blanda
Hadl
Lamonica
in AFL history. >>
He actually sat 1968 due to injury...I agree with your rankings...And none of the bottom 3 are HOF material...Blanda REALLY only had 4-5 good AFL years..He wouldn't have made the HOF either if he hadn't become the Raiders kicker and added 9 years to his 26 year long career...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
QBs
John Hadl-4
RBs
Paul Lowe-4
WRs
Pete Retzlaff-3
Max McGee-3
Gino Cappelletti-3
Charley Hennigan-2
TE
Jerry Smith-5
Lionel Taylor-4
OL
Ed Budde-6
DLs
Rich Jackson-8**
Gene Lipscomb-8**
LBs
Maxie Baughan-5
Andy Russell-9**
DBs
Jake Scott-5
Dick LeBeau-1
K/P
Jim Bakken-5
Updated list w/ vote count...As of right now, anyone with 7** or more votes would make the set:
QBs
Charlie Conerly-10**
John Hadl-5
Jack Kemp-1
John Brodie-4
Roman Gabriel-5
RBs
Larry Brown-4
Beattie Feathers-2
Willie Galimore-2
Floyd Little-10**
Paul Lowe-5
Clem Daniels-3
Chuck Foreman-4
Don Perkins-3
Alan Ameche-3
'Deacon' Dan Towler-3
WRs
Bob Hayes-11**
Billy Howton-4
Art Powell-3
Pete Retzlaff-4
Del Shofner-4
Mac Speedie-10**
Otis Taylor-11**
Billy Wilson-10**
Max McGee-4
Ken Kavanaugh-3
Gino Cappelletti-4
Gary Collins-3
Charley Hennigan-3
TE
Jerry Smith-5
Bob Tucker-4
Lionel Taylor-5
Fred Arbanas-1
OL
Ed Budde-7**
Ken Gray-3
Winston Hill-5
Jerry Kramer-11**
John Niland-3
Dick Stanfel-10**
Walt Sweeney-5
Mick Tingelhoff-12**
Fuzzy Thurston-4
Jim Tyrer-9**
Grady Alderman-4
Dick Schafrath-4
Gale Gillingham-5
Len Hauss-4
George Kunz-4
Ray Wietecha-3
Jim Ray Smith-2
Ralph Neely-2
Bucko Kilroy-3
DLs
Gene Brito-4
Curley Culp-3
L.C. Greenwood-12**
Claude Humphrey-11**
Rich Jackson-8**
Alex Karras-9**
Gene Lipscomb-8**
Jim Marshall-8**
Jerry Mays-2
Tom Sestak-3
Cedric Hardman-3
Bill Stanfill-3
LBs
Maxie Baughan-6
Chris Hanburger-12**
E.J. Holub-4
Chuck Howley-12**
Lee Roy Jordan-11**
Tommy Nobis-12**
Les Richter-6
Dave Robinson-11**
Andy Russell-9**
Bill Bergey-4
Mike Stratton-2
Isiah Robertson-3
Joe Fortunato-1
DBs
Dick Anderson-3
Jack Butler-8**
Pat Fischer-10**
Cliff Harris-12**
Lemar Parrish-8**
Johnny Robinson-10**
Bob Boyd-2
Bobby Dillion-3
Jake Scott-6
Erich Barnes-4
Jimmy Patton-3
Dave Grayson-2
Dick LeBeau-2
Emmitt Thomas-2
K/P
Jim Bakken-5
Jerrel Wilson-4
Votes counted: jasp24, BillsGridironGreats, davemri, mikescardcloset, JLoo, bcd33, FavreFan1971, gregm13, SKINSFAN, Rick Gosselin (lol), GDM67, cardbender, MAD
As of now, 27 players would make the list. A few others are very close, I'll let the vote run until tomorrow morning...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>I still think that Jerry Smith should be included.
Regards,
Greg M. >>
He's a no doubter, for me.
<< <i>
<< <i>I still think that Jerry Smith should be included.
Regards,
Greg M. >>
He's a no doubter, for me. >>
If he was that close, he would AT LEAST get some type of consideration from the committee..Now that Sanders is in, maybe it will open up his possibilities..For me, he was a good TE, but not a HOF one...In those days you needed to be a great blocker as a TE, and Smith was not...Regardless of whatever he was or was not off the field, I would be surprised to see him ever get in...Just not enough credentials...2 Pro Bowls, 1 time 1st Team All-Pro in a 13 year career? Yes, he accumulated descent numbers for his day, but really what separates him from Fred Arbanas or Riley Odoms who both played during his era? Both of those guys were much more highly regarded during the same years Smith was playing? Odoms played in 15 fewer games over his career and caught 25 fewer passes, had 259 more yards, 19 fewer TDs...Odoms was a 1st Team All-Pro 3 times and was selected to 4 Pro Bowls...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I stand corrected on the passing yards for Kemp in 1960.
I think Kemp was a fine leader of the teams he was on too.
I just didn't feel he was that much better, if at all than John Hadl.
The rushing TD's he had in his career were impressive. I don't think he ever makes the Hall either.
One thing about Blanda, was that he was the AFC player of the year in 1970 at the age of 43 for his last minute game winning kicking and passing exploits. I remember seeing a few of those games as a kid. I think he had more than just 5 good years in Football. It was closer to 10 years. He was the AFL player of the year in 1961. He did win a few AFL championships along the way. Set ton's of records in both passing and scoring as well. Sure his first 10 years in Football with the Bears were probably average, but he was a long time star of the AFL and then the AFC in the early to mid 1970's. He was a great backup QB for the Raiders too for a few years well into his 40's, at a time when most NFL players that age had been retired for 10 years already.
To me longevity in Football counts for more than any other sport. Simply by the physical nature of the game. It's not like in Baseball, where a player can hang around forever as long he can swing a bat as DH, pad his hitting numbers and not have to play the field.
In Football, there's no plays off. If you're on defense or offense there's 60-80 plays per game you're involved in.
That's why I rank Blanda and Jim Marshall right up there with the other greats. I mean, don't you think that NFL GM's are always looking to upgrade their teams with younger talent. The fact these guys held their jobs and performed them at high levels with championship calibre teams every year when they were both over 30 years old, speaks volumes to me.
Even though Jim Marshall lacks pro bowl appearances and All-NFL team votes, he must have been great to simply hold down a starting position on a great DL on so many great Viking teams in the 1970's at his advanced age. Even though he was fairly small in stature for a DL, he never wore down or missed any games. The four Super Bowl appearances for the Vikings during his career adds to his reputation. I'm sure every draft for the Vikings in the 1970's they were looking to upgrade their line in some way. They'd bring in some new talent or draft pick only to find out that this 'new talent' couldn't beat out old man Marshall once again. He was a rock.
Rich
Let's look closer...Marshall played from 1960-1979..He started every game he ever played in, 282 in all, which is very impressive, no doubt about it..And honestly is the reason he is a serious senior candidate...He played with the Vikings from 1961-1979...Eller was the other DE starter from 64-77...Page from 1968-1977 at DT, and Gary Larsen the other DT from 65-74...The personnel were very stable, and Larsen was no slouch making just as many Pro Bowls as Marshall (2)..From 61-79, the Vikings drafted Only 3 DE's in the first 3 rounds of any of those drafts...Carl Eller(1964) who became an immediate starter, Mike Mullaney (1975) who replaced Eller as the starter in 1978 when he left to Seattle, and Randy Holloway (1978) who did replace Marshall as starter when Marshall retired after the 1979 season...So the Vikings weren't exactly TRYING to replace him and nor should they have...He was an excellent player...But take away the final 5 years of his career, in which he was performing at a very pedestrian level and he's not even in the discussion...Vinny Testaverde played forever and had the same number of Pro Bowls, yet I don't hear anyone screaming his name in the HOF debate...
If you watched Greenwood, or Claude Humphrey play or even Big Daddy Lipscomb or Tombstone Jackson, and then compare what they did ON THE FIELD to Jim Marshall, all of those guys were far more dominant..Had ANY of them played for 20 straight years without missing a game, they would have been in the HOF a long time ago..Marshall was a role player on a bad ass defense...He was to Vikings what Horace Grant was to the Bulls...To put him in the HOF simply because he was lucky enough not to get hurt would be wrong IMO. At least the other players who were better as his same position should go in first...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I know the lack of player movement caused many players to stay put during their career. It's a different NFL today with tons of players exchanging teams.
I guess my point was Marshall was he was a vital cog on many fine playoff teams and defenses. Not getting hurt was obviously a part of his longevity, some luck, and some his physical conditioning. But I find it hard to believe that the Vikings wouldn't try to upgrade his position with a lower paid rookie if Marshall was just hanging on the last few years. The Vikes let Alan Page get away after what 10 years to a division rival. Eller was traded. Marshall wasn't. Maybe he didn't warrant more than a stack of clean towels in trade being a late 30's DL, so the Vikes just kept him. I don't really know. But I don't think he was just hanging on either. Being undersized and older for his position, he had to have some skills left, cunning, and smarts to keep being a more than capable starter at his advanced age. I saw Marshall play at least 30 NFL games, and I don't remember him ever being an easy defender to run through or around even when he was 37 or 38 years old. He was tough.
As far as Big Daddy, I've only seen film on him. From what I've heard about him, he was either dominant or he took plays off. He was one of those players if he set his mind to it, he could just dominant. I didn't place a vote for him for the Hall because I felt a few other DL's were just more deserving. But in all honestly I wouldn't have a problem if he got the call to the Hall.
In my opinion, it's difficult to judge linemen. Unless you saw them play extensively, then all we have go on is the pro bowls, all league selections, and team success to judge them on.
I wish there was more footage of the early AFL's games to see.
Do you guys think Rodney Harrison has a chance? I know he's known as a dirty player, but I have always loved his intensity. Maybe this reputation has hurt his pro bowl chances?
Speaking of pro bowls... Why the heck was Gregg Bingham never invited? He was a tackling monster and that's what defense is all about I thought... Add to that 21 interceptions. I'm currently watching the same thing happen again with Keith Bulluck. How can you lead the entire NFL in tackles and not get an invite to the pro bowl?
<< <i>Switching gears a little...
Do you guys think Rodney Harrison has a chance? I know he's known as a dirty player, but I have always loved his intensity. Maybe this reputation has hurt his pro bowl chances?
Speaking of pro bowls... Why the heck was Gregg Bingham never invited? He was a tackling monster and that's what defense is all about I thought... Add to that 21 interceptions. I'm currently watching the same thing happen again with Keith Bulluck. How can you lead the entire NFL in tackles and not get an invite to the pro bowl? >>
I don't think Harrison has dominant enough for long enough...Injuries have really taken their toll on him and his career...
LB is a tough position to judge...The LBs that are considered a "disrupter" tend to get more pub and more accolades than the steady "make the tackle" kind of guys...Nature of the game I guess...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I never heard Rodney Hampton was a 'dirty player' before. Is this a well known fact. I mean did he kick guys in piles or take cheap shots on the field? I know he'll never make the Hall....... I wish he would though. I have a stack of 50 of his 1990 Score Update RC's. LOL.
What about blocking Tight ends? You never really hear of any of them mentioned for the HOF. The closest was probably Charlie Sanders who just got in. Although he was a good receiving TE too.
What about guys like Ron Kramer, Marv Fleming, Fred Arbanas, Raymond Chester, Jim Muscheller (sp) Colts, etc...... and I'm sure there's many others you guys could add to the list. Do you think any of them will ever make the Hall?
Come on Jason, where's the list of great blocking TE's? I know you must have one already selected. Please share.....
Although no such records are kept by the league, he is believed to hold the record for most times fined by the league for unnecessary roughness or unsportsmanlike conduct. Notorious for his cheap shots, Harrison was voted the dirtiest player in the NFL by his peers according to a poll conducted by Sports Illustrated. In 2006, Harrison further solidified his reputation as one of the dirtiest players in NFL history when he, yet again, topped the list of the dirtiest players compiled by Sports Illustrated. Of the 361 NFL players polled during the preseason, an incredible 23 percent of them pointed to Harrison as the league's dirtiest player. When interviewed about Harrison for an October 19, 2006 Boston Herald article, Buffalo receiver Lee Evans supported the notion that Harrison is a dirty player, “you can see it on film. It will be subtle, like making a tackle and doing something a little extra after it. You’re getting up and maybe he pushes your face into the ground or gives you a little kick in the back."
In all the games I've seen him in I've never thought, "man, that was a cheap shot", but again maybe I haven't seen the right game(s).
<< <i>I agree Greenwood, Jackson. and Humphrey were all better than Marshall and should go to the Hall first. I saw them all play. >>
No argument on those three. I voted for them all.
<< <i>I guess my point was Marshall was he was a vital cog on many fine playoff teams and defenses. Not getting hurt was obviously a part of his longevity, some luck, and some his physical conditioning. But I find it hard to believe that the Vikings wouldn't try to upgrade his position with a lower paid rookie if Marshall was just hanging on the last few years. The Vikes let Alan Page get away after what 10 years to a division rival. >>
And Alan says they citied the fact that he had slimmed down as a reason for sending him to the Bears, so it was something their management was cognizant of.
<< <i> Being undersized and older for his position, he had to have some skills left, cunning, and smarts to keep being a more than capable starter at his advanced age. I saw Marshall play at least 30 NFL games, and I don't remember him ever being an easy defender to run through or around even when he was 37 or 38 years old. He was tough. >>
It's hard to overemphasize just how relatively undersized he was. And yet he still kept down that side of the line for a long, long time on a top flight team.
Of all of the leagues, the NFL is the most ruthless and pitiless when it comes to personnel decisions, but as cb points out, in all of Jim's career, they never seemed to want to move him out, or think they could. Just something to keep in mind.
<< <i>From Wikipedia on Harrison:
Although no such records are kept by the league, he is believed to hold the record for most times fined by the league for unnecessary roughness or unsportsmanlike conduct. Notorious for his cheap shots, Harrison was voted the dirtiest player in the NFL by his peers according to a poll conducted by Sports Illustrated. In 2006, Harrison further solidified his reputation as one of the dirtiest players in NFL history when he, yet again, topped the list of the dirtiest players compiled by Sports Illustrated. Of the 361 NFL players polled during the preseason, an incredible 23 percent of them pointed to Harrison as the league's dirtiest player. When interviewed about Harrison for an October 19, 2006 Boston Herald article, Buffalo receiver Lee Evans supported the notion that Harrison is a dirty player, “you can see it on film. It will be subtle, like making a tackle and doing something a little extra after it. You’re getting up and maybe he pushes your face into the ground or gives you a little kick in the back."
In all the games I've seen him in I've never thought, "man, that was a cheap shot", but again maybe I haven't seen the right game(s). >>
Sorry, I totally mis-read your post. I was thinking of Rodney Hampton the Giants running back from the 1990's for some strange reason.
So yeah, Rodney Harrison does indeed have a bad rep as being a cheapshot hitter. The Conrad Dobler of defense if you will.
Of all of the leagues, the NFL is the most ruthless and pitiless when it comes to personnel decisions.
GDM67,
Exactly on Jim Marshall. I think he played around 230 lbs. at his peak. I saw an interview with Marshall a few years ago and he said he played at 220 lbs during his later years to try to get an edge over the heavier lineman. Trying to make up for his lost speed as he aged by playing lighter. Anything to gain an edge on the opponents linemen. Alan Page played lighter as he got older too. Maybe it had something to do with the Vikings defensive line coach theories on playing the DL position. Even Eller who was 6'6", played at 250 or so. The Vikings had some lean beef up front.
Rich
<< <i>
What about blocking Tight ends? You never really hear of any of them mentioned for the HOF. The closest was probably Charlie Sanders who just got in. Although he was a good receiving TE too.
What about guys like Ron Kramer, Marv Fleming, Fred Arbanas, Raymond Chester, Jim Muscheller (sp) Colts, etc...... and I'm sure there's many others you guys could add to the list. Do you think any of them will ever make the Hall?
Come on Jason, where's the list of great blocking TE's? I know you must have one already selected. Please share..... >>
Obviously, simply being a good blocking TE is not going to get you into the HOF, only that being a WR playing TE (aka Jerry Smith) in the 60s-70s did not fit the model of what a good TE was back then. Being a great blocker, but having only 200 catches (Fred Arbanas is a great example) is not going to get you into the HOF. I don't think another Senior TE will make the HOF, at least not in the next 20 years..Sanders was the first, and of the guys on our list I don't see any of them as HOFers. None of them have gotten any support from the Senior Committee. Sanders was easily the best of that bunch and I was surprised he even got in..He barely beat out Bob Hayes in the senior selections and my guess he would not have if Hayes weren't a senior finalist just 3 years ago...To look at the overall list of Senior candidates and think that only 2 of these guys will get in every year, not to mention the modern candidates who will join this list in the coming years tells me that there is no chance.
Look, we all have different ideas and different favorites that we think are the most overlooked, etc, etc, etc...And that's ok..You think we are bad, the senior committee has the same issues...Everyone has different guys they are backing/pushing/hoping to get in...We all voted on this Senior list, and we mostly agree that 28 of the players are very deserving. Next year, I would definitely think Gradishar, Kuechenberg and Pearson would all deserve to be added to this list if/when they don't get in the HOF in 2008.
The reality is Jerry Smith, along with other 3 TEs on our list will likely never get close. If he does, and he makes the semi-finals for the Seniors (Final 15-20) then we will request to add him. To my knowledge he's never been that close and was also never a finalist in his 20 years as a modern candidate either.
That doesn't mean you can't own his card. Just means that the rest of us won't be required to buy it for the Future HOF- Seniors Set. My hope is that every card i but for the set eventually ends up in the HOF RC set.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Updated list w/ vote count...As of right now, anyone with 7** or more votes would make the set:
QBs
Charlie Conerly-10*
RBs
Floyd Little-10**
WRs
Bob Hayes-11**
Mac Speedie-10**
Otis Taylor-11**
Billy Wilson-10**
OL
Ed Budde-7**
Jerry Kramer-11**
Dick Stanfel-10**
Mick Tingelhoff-12**
Jim Tyrer-9**
DLs
L.C. Greenwood-12**
Claude Humphrey-11**
Rich Jackson-8**
Alex Karras-9**
Gene Lipscomb-8**
Jim Marshall-8**
LBs
Chris Hanburger-12**
Chuck Howley-12**
Lee Roy Jordan-11**
Tommy Nobis-12**
Dave Robinson-11**
Andy Russell-9**
DBs
Jack Butler-8**
Pat Fischer-10**
Cliff Harris-12**
Lemar Parrish-8**
Johnny Robinson-10**
28 very strong candidates IMO. I will put the spreadsheet together today and post here along with the weighting once complete. I will be submitting this set as well as the Modern set to Cosetta today. Hopefully will be up online within the next couple of weeks. Now the hard part, trying to find all these cards I USED to own!lol
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Card # Year Co. First Name Last Name Grade Weight
53 1948 LEAF CHARLIE CONERLY 10
8 1950 BOWMAN MAC SPEEDIE 3
36 1955 BOWMAN DICK STANFEL 2
81 1955 BOWMAN BILLY WILSON 2
15 1957 TOPPS JACK BUTLER 2
36 1959 TOPPS GENE LIPSCOMB 1.5
103 1959 TOPPS ALEX KARRAS 2
116 1959 TOPPS JERRY KRAMER 2
202 1961 FLEER JOHNNY ROBINSON 1.5
107 1963 TOPPS JIM MARSHALL 2
93 1964 TOPPS ED BUDDE 1
108 1964 TOPPS JIM TYRER 1
110 1964 PHILADELPHIA MICK TINGELHOFF 1.5
160 1965 PHILADELPHIA PAT FISCHER 1.5
58 1966 PHILADELPHIA BOB HAYES 3.5
59 1966 PHILADELPHIA CHUCK HOWLEY 2.5
75 1966 TOPPS OTIS TAYLOR 2
7 1967 PHILADELPHIA TOMMY NOBIS 2
54 1967 PHILADELPHIA LEE ROY JORDAN 1.5
80 1967 PHILADELPHIA DAVE ROBINSON 1.5
183 1967 PHILADELPHIA CHRIS HANBURGER 2
163 1968 TOPPS ANDY RUSSELL 1
173 1968 TOPPS FLOYD LITTLE 1.5
95 1970 TOPPS RICH JACKSON 1
156 1970 TOPPS CLAUDE HUMPHREY 1
233 1971 TOPPS LEMAR PARRISH 1
101 1972 TOPPS L.C. GREENWOOD 1.5
490 1975 TOPPS CLIFF HARRIS 1
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Regarding the weights. I know the majority of the weight is by the scarcity of the card or the quality of the player but what about the difficulty to get the card graded high? 1969 Topps - 1971 Topps - 1962 Topps due to boders. I think this should push some of the weights up on certain cards. What do you think?
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
I think we should go by SMR period or take all accounts into effect before we put weights on sets. This HOF wannabe set is not that important as the HOF Rookie or All - Time sets but I wanted to strike up a conversation to open up other thoughts on weighting of these sets.
dave
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i>Jason tracks all cards so I'm sure all is taken into consideration. Just by first glance, all seems good. If you have any suggestions/comments about the weighting, (ie..one seems to be weighted too high or not high enough), please post here and we can discuss...
dave >>
Bingo..While the SMR is wrong, its wrong on 99% of the cards, so that is used as a basis. Not my call, that is what Cosetta has told me in the past to go by. But I do track the prices, and adjusted a couple of cards accordingly based on what I know they sell for..All the issues you pointed out, particularly condition sensitive cards are reflected in the sales price correct? If a card is tough to come by in PSA 8, it sells for more, makes sense. You pointed out 69, 71, and 62, and the only card from any of these sets is the 1971 Parrish, and its value in PSA 8 is clearly a grade weight of 1. It sells under $20...
The HOF RC set in particular, the weights are based SOLEY on SMR. I update the grade weights with Cosetta once per year and do not make any adjustments. We all know it is not correct, but that is what we have to go by. If you start trying to weight the sets to meet what each collector thinks, you will run into the same issues we had here on some of the players..And that is, everyone has a different idea of what is right and best. For the record, these are the specific adjustments I made on this set weighting:
Bob Hayes from 3.0 to 3.5, as it usually sells above $200. The 1955 Stanfel and 1957 Butler were bumped from 1.5 to 2.0 as both of these cards usually sell in the $100 range. Also the 1967 Philly Hanburger and Nobis were also bumped from 1.5-2.0 because they typically sell higher than $100...The 1948 Conerly has an SMR of $1300 in PSA 8, and it would likely sell for twice that amount at a minimum, which is why it is so far and above the other cards in weighting. This is going to be a liquid set, so it would be irresponsible to weight anything else higher than the Bob Hayes at 3.5, because it is the 2nd most valuable card with an SMR of $145, but selling at $200 plus.
If you have any specific changes you think should be made, feel free to bring them up and I will take it into consideration. I'm trying to create the best set possible for everyone...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Personally, I'm just hoping Cosetta's schedule is open enough that we can get these sets loaded sooner rather than later..lol
I'm interested in seeing what everyone already has..I'm missing 20 of the 28 Senior's...lol..Hopefully I will have a few more in hand prior to the set going live...I have a feeling this will spike the prices a bit...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Thanks a lot for doing this Jason. I think it's a cool set and like I said before, it'll really help me when I look at retiring off my other all time sets in favor of the Decade team sets and the HOF set (Which is now nearing 80% completion, but still in 18th place)
-Josh
My eBay Store
BigCrumbs! I made over $250 last year!
<< <i>Woo Hoo. These team sets are paying off! I actually have 15 or 16 of the seniors already. Though a couple are in 5/6 holders. It'll be a nice start though.
Thanks a lot for doing this Jason. I think it's a cool set and like I said before, it'll really help me when I look at retiring off my other all time sets in favor of the Decade team sets and the HOF set (Which is now nearing 80% completion, but still in 18th place)
-Josh >>
Josh, I retired most of my All-Time Team sets in 2005...Since I wasn't sure which Seniors to keep or sell, I pretty much sold them all with the thought that if/when they ever pop up as Senior Finalists, I would pick them up then..It was just costing me too much to keep all of the sets I had going. Of the cards I sold, 12 of them were cards I now need for the Seniors set...PSA 10 Greenwood, PSA 8 Bob Hayes, PSA 8 Howley, PSA 8 Hanburger being the most expensive of the bunch...Based on what I sold for then, its going to cost me more now to get them back. But having a set that they can all belong to rather than having to collect all the Team Sets is going to help me justify (to myself) owning the cards...Other card I sold like PSA 9 Rayfield Wright, PSA 9 Harry Carson who eventually MADE the HOF, those cost me 3-4 times what I sold them for as non-HOFers to get them back as HOFers...I think whoever collects these sets will save money in the long run...Everytime one of these guys gets elected, particularly the Seniors, you will have probably paid MUCH less than what the price of each will be as a HOFer. Just ask Gene Hickerson, Charlie Sanders and Roger Wehrli!!! lol
I'm also glad the voting went so well and kept the Senior set manageable. 28 is a solid number as I feared initially the set could have gone the other way and ended up even bigger than the modern set (54)...I am 99.9% certain that the 2008 Senior HOF candidates reside in this set...Hard to say after that, because members of the Senior Committee do change from time to time, and that can change the names that get pushed...
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Shag
Do you have any PSA 8's? I need all of the 70's rookies but Greenwood.
Regards,
Greg M.
References:
Onlychild, Ahmanfan, fabfrank, wufdude, jradke, Reese, Jasp, thenavarro
E-Bay id: greg_n_meg
I have a 1959 PSA 8 Jerry Kramer rc available if anyone is interested.
Regards,
Greg M.
References:
Onlychild, Ahmanfan, fabfrank, wufdude, jradke, Reese, Jasp, thenavarro
E-Bay id: greg_n_meg
<< <i>Do you have any PSA 8's? I need all of the 70's rookies but Greenwood. >>
Just a Parrish, but I only have 1.
Seniors:
PSA 8 1967 Philly Tommy Nobis
Modern:
PSA 9 1984 Topps Morten Andersen
PSA 9 1984 Topps Darrell Green
PSA 9 1986 Topps Andre Reed
PSA 9 1993 SP Will Shields
PSA 9 1997 SP Authentic Orlando Pace
PSA 9 1999 SP Authentic Torry Holt
If anyone is interested in buying or trading for these, shoot me a PM or you can e-mail me at jabeduco@yahoo.com.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
The 67 Robinson however even though its a packer is 1 of the easier cards in the 67 set
The last Nobis sold for around 90+ by the way in a 8
<< <i>Jason like always i think you have a good grip on the weights ,i may suggest that the 67 nobis and hanburger are going to much much tougher that most think , The Hanburger will be a bi------ch 1 of the hardest of all on the list.
The 67 Robinson however even though its a packer is 1 of the easier cards in the 67 set
The last Nobis sold for around 90+ by the way in a 8 >>
I already know the Hanburger well..I've owned a couple, maybe even one from you back in the day I if I recall...They won't come cheap now, never did...I already have a Nobis 9...The other toughie is going to be the 1964 Tyrer...VERY low pop for some reason..
If you find any Hanburger's floating around, throw me a bone!!!lol
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
<< <i>The reality is Jerry Smith, along with other 3 TEs on our list will likely never get close. >>
I'm forced to agree, but considering that his career ended 30 years ago and his records were only recently broken, that is truly a shame.
<< <i>I think he played around 230 lbs. at his peak. I saw an interview with Marshall a few years ago and he said he played at 220 lbs during his later years to try to get an edge over the heavier lineman. Trying to make up for his lost speed as he aged by playing lighter. Anything to gain an edge on the opponents linemen. Alan Page played lighter as he got older too. Maybe it had something to do with the Vikings defensive line coach theories on playing the DL position. Even Eller who was 6'6", played at 250 or so. The Vikings had some lean beef up front.
Rich >>
The Bills seemed to subscribe to the same theories with Bruce and Bennett, with similar mixed results.
1948 Wojo. Paid $26 raw off ebay. My other "UNCENTERED 6" is currently on Ebay. This one could be a 7 if not for the lower left corner and very slight browning of left side.
61 Shaw. I actually bought this raw at a card shop in my hometown. It is a very small shop that I've been in maybe 5 times. I just happened to pop in during a downtown festival and saw this hidden in the bottom of a dusty case. I paid $12 for it. It will be going on ebay because I already have a nice 7.
66 HIckerson. Bought raw off ebay via a BIN for $8 from arizona card sales. (as seen earlier in this thread). I bought it after announced as Sr finanlist but before actually elected. Upon receiving it back, It did look better than I remembered. Still suprised it didn't at least get a ST qualifier. This will also end up on ebay.
71 Sanders and Wehrli. I thought both had a good shot at 8. They are very nice 7's though. Paid $10 for Wehrli raw off ebay and $6 for Sanders off someone's website. (cant remember which one) I actually bought it the day he was elected. I will be keeping both of these for my set.
74 Guy. Bought raw off ebay for $3 plus shipping. Thought this was a slam dunk 8 and had a great shot at a 9. I still don't know what I missed. I may have to resubmit this one.
35 Chicle Griffith. I know he isn't a HOF'er, but I couldn't resist this one. I put a lowball Best Offer of $50 and it was accepted. Anyone have any idea what this one might sell for??
I've heard that Ebay will be having a 20 cent listing day tomorrow. You will see some of these with fairly high starting prices but it doesn't hurt to try right?? If they don't sell, I will probably just list them starting at 99cents and let em ride.
Dave
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i>
35 Chicle Griffith. I know he isn't a HOF'er, but I couldn't resist this one. I put a lowball Best Offer of $50 and it was accepted. Anyone have any idea what this one might sell for??
Dave >>
Dave last PSA 5 on ebay sold for $97...Sounds like you scored another deal!
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
Your final list of candidates looks fine and the weighting seems okay to me too. Thanks for all of your work on setting up this new set. It will be fun trying to piece together some of these cards. I have a few of them already.
Dave,
Nice cards! Looks like the Sanders RC only missed being an 8 for the t-b centering. I thought your 'raw' Hickerson would only grade a 7 too, but it looks nice in the holder. The slight stain doesn't seem to detract much at all. Again, some nice buys by you.
Rich
If I did this right...
On the Modern set I will have a GPA of 8.95 - 80% - 5.66
Senior Set GPA 6.93 - 54% - 2.99
Not the greatest, but certainly a nice head start. Heck, I can get a couple free gradings from the modern set as soon as it's listed.
Can't wait to see the sets listed!
By the way, does anyone have a PSA 10 Jimmy Smith or Tim Brown for sale?
My eBay Store
BigCrumbs! I made over $250 last year!
In a few cases I have >10 to be graded that should all be PSA 8 or better.
My eBay Store
BigCrumbs! I made over $250 last year!
MODERN
This set is comprised of modern candidates eligible for induction into the Pro Football Hall of Fame as well as current players who have already proven to be Hall of Fame worthy. The players on this list are all widely considered to be likely or definite future Hall of Fame inductees. To be included in this set, an active player must have completed a minimum of 5 seasons in the NFL, and a retired candidate must have ended his career no longer than 25 years ago. As these players are elected the the Pro Football Hall of Fame, their card will be deleted from this Registry set and added directly to the NFL Hall of Fame Rookie Players set.
SENIOR
This set is comprised of senior candidates eligible for induction into the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Senior candidates are Hall of Fame eligible players whose career ended more than 25 years ago. Most of these players were very close to induction during their years as modern candidates. The Hall of Fame Senior Committee selects two players each year from the group of senior candidates which are presented to the Hall of Fame voters’ side-by-side with the 15 modern finalists. While the players on this list could possibly become Hall of Famers in the future, all have waited 26+ years so none are considered likely or definite. The set consists of the top senior candidates over the past few years and provides a glimpse at which players are believed to have the best chance at election. As these players are elected the the Pro Football Hall of Fame, their card will be deleted from this Registry set and added directly to the NFL Hall of Fame Rookie Players set.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Dave
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!
<< <i>
MODERN
This set is comprised of modern candidates eligible for induction into the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Modern candidates are Hall of Fame eligible players whose career ended between 5 and 25 years ago. The players on this list are widely considered to be likely or definite future Hall of Fame inductees.
>>
Do we need to qualify the lower end of the years? Why not choose current to 25 years. We had Emmitt Smith and Brett Favre on our list of current players to get in. If we choose 5-25 many players would be left out. Which way are we leaning?
<< <i>
<< <i>
MODERN
This set is comprised of modern candidates eligible for induction into the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Modern candidates are Hall of Fame eligible players whose career ended between 5 and 25 years ago. The players on this list are widely considered to be likely or definite future Hall of Fame inductees.
>>
Do we need to qualify the lower end of the years? Why not choose current to 25 years. We had Emmitt Smith and Brett Favre on our list of current players to get in. If we choose 5-25 many players would be left out. Which way are we leaning? >>
You are absolutely correct. I totally left out the piece regarding ACTIVE players, which we will obviously have in the set. I will adjust accordingly. See, this is why I asked for comments!!lol
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
Jason
according to my values and my needs. Nothing holds dominion over me, I stand alone as the ruler of my life.
My eBay Store
BigCrumbs! I made over $250 last year!
FINISHED 12/8/2008!!!